No minority-owned firms

Minority ownership hasn’t been a major factor in the architecture firm selection process — because it can’t be. None of the nine firms still in the running appeared in a search of a state database of certified minority or women-owned businesses. SPS Director of Business Operations Scott Wendt said he did not believe that any minority firms were included in the original 17. For construction bids, however, Wendt said those seeking projects over $100,000 are required to submit a disadvantaged business enterprise, or DBE, form, as a result of the new policy. Wendt said there have been “a couple of times” where the district rejected a bid because the DBE form wasn’t included or didn’t indicate that the company made a “good-faith effort” to work with minorities.

More

ADVERTISEMENT

In September 2010, Springfield Public Schools added two sentences to a district policy after the firm selection process for a series of school building projects became controversial.

Three years later, in the first real test of the policy prompted by another round of projects, the heads of some local architecture firms are concerned that those words aren’t translating into action — while a district official says he believes they are.

The district’s policy change came after local architects voiced opposition in January 2010 to the district’s recommendation to the school board that a $9.3 million contract to expand Westport Elementary be awarded to an Omaha-based firm. The school board went with the recommendation shortly thereafter, but some members did express some reservations.

“I’m not certain the economic situations in the community were taken into account to the extent that they should have been,” board member Michael Hoeman said at the time.

The first addition to the policy said the school district “will encourage submissions by minority, and disadvantaged businesses.”

The second addition expanded upon an earlier line declaring that “proximity to and familiarity with” the project’s location will be one of several factors used when selecting firms.

“Whenever the service is equal and the evaluated cost is the same, after consideration of the effects of time of delivery and other potential costs, the District will prefer first the Springfield service, then the Missouri service, then the American service,” the new line reads.

The district has significant freedom when it comes to choosing architectural firms because they’re classified as a “service,” as is engineering and land surveying work.

Voters approved a new bond issue, along with a corresponding tax levy hike, on April 2. The $71.65 million issue includes money to construct a new elementary school, add classrooms to two others, renovate the common areas in two high schools, upgrade technology and expand the district’s network bandwidth.

(Page 2 of 3)

A list obtained by the News-Leader of nine firms still in the running for architect work includes four Springfield firms, one firm each based in St. Louis and Omaha, and three partnerships between local firms and non-local firms.

District spokeswoman Teresa Bledsoe said that 17 firms responded to the district’s request in February for statements of qualification for the proposed projects. Those firms responded to a questionnaire by early March, and a review panel has selected nine firms for the next round of interviews.

SPS Director of Business Operations Scott Wendt said that of the eight firms that have not been selected so far, six were local firms, one was based out of the area, and one was a partnership between a local and non-local firm.

Comparatively, out of 21 firms that submitted bids during for the last school district bond issue, 19 were local.

Out of the running, local firms complain

Geoffrey Butler, president of Springfield-based Butler, Rosenbury & Partners, learned last week that his firm won’t get any of the new work.

“Where they have evaluated the preference for local?” he said after seeing the list.

While Butler obviously believes that his firm should still be in the running, he said he is most concerned with how little he knows about the district’s selection process.

“They’re not very transparent or forthcoming with the list, or how they got it,” he said.

Butler believes that keeping the contracts in the local economy will benefit the area far more than hiring an out-of-town firm. A 6 percent fee on the projects will mean that close to $5 million goes to the firms, he estimated.

“Every dollar you send out of town doesn’t turn over — it’s gone forever,” he said.

Chris Ball, president of Springfield-based Jack Ball Architects, said he doesn’t see how the list of remaining firms reflects the change in policy.

“It seems at least to our perspective as if they have not done that,” he said.

Ball, whose firm was also eliminated from the running, said he thought his firm would have been a logical choice for a $1.1 million project that will add four classrooms to Hickory Hills Elementary School. The firm designed the original building, including a possible future expansion.

(Page 3 of 3)

“Nobody knows more about that building than I do,” he said.

Ball and Butler both emphasized that they believe there are local firms capable of completing all the projects. Ball said he thinks the district has a right to choose an outside firm, but also has a commitment to the local business community that pays taxes supporting the district. Butler took a more aggressive viewpoint.

“I am totally against any out-of-town firm getting any of the work,” he wrote in an email to the district.

Butler said his firm does work on hotels around the country, but said that private companies — as opposed to public entities like the school district — should be allowed to hire who they want.

“We know the client and the hotel, and we’re specialists,” he said.

Butler and Ball said they think that local firms partnered with out-of-town firms because they believed they would not be attractive to the district without them.

Butler and Ball’s complaints come several weeks after Springfield’s Minorities in Business advocacy group issued a statement opposing a “yes” vote on the latest bond issue after expressing concerns about a lack of minority contracts for construction and design projects. The group softened its stance a day later, instead just urging citizens to vote for what they felt was right.

MIB President John Oke-Thomas said his concerns date back more than a decade.

District says it
uses new policy

Wendt said he views the partnerships between the out-of-town firms and local firms as a decision of the firms involved, and couldn’t speak as to why they would seek them. And he stressed that there are only five available projects, so it is necessary to eliminate many of the firms.

“We’re not saying that any of the 17 firms are not qualified,” he said.

Spokeswoman Bledsoe noted that Butler’s firm was awarded two projects from a 2006 bond issue, the district’s largest, when the district also used three non-local firms. She said that was not seen as an issue at the time.

“I’m not sure what’s changed over those years,” she said.

Wendt said that the review panel of seven members — which includes himself, the district’s director of facilities and a project manager for each of the five projects — has kept the policy of considering local firms in mind throughout the process.

“Someone can always argue whether all things are equal or not,” he said. “It’s subjective.”

Wendt said the district hopes to present their recommendations on which firms to assign to which projects at the board’s May meeting.